User reviews

In Paris, a family is victim of a tragic incident, when the patriarch is denounced by his wife of pedophilia. Years later, the three sisters have independent dysfunctional lives and never see each other. The middle sister Sophie (Emmanuelle Béart) finds that her beloved husband and photographer Pierre (Jacques Gamblin) is unfaithful and is having an affair with Julie (Maryam d'Abo) and he leaves her. When the lover discovers that Pierre has two children, she ends the affair. The youngest, Anne (Marie Gillain), is student of Sorbonne and has a crush and gets pregnant of her professor Frédéric (Jacques Perrin), who is married and father of her best friend. The oldest sister, Céline (Karin Viard), is a lonely woman that periodically travels by train to visit her handicapped dumb mother Marie (Carole Bouquet) that is trapped in a wheelchair in an asylum for elders. When the stranger Sébastien (Guillaume Canet) contacts Céline, she believes he is a shy admirer; however, after an awkward encounter, he reveals secrets from the past that will affect the relationship among the sisters.

"L' Enfer" is a heavy drama of sisters in love, actually doomed love, and is an analogy to the Medea Greek tragedy: Sophie loves her unfaithful husband; Anne loves her professor and father's figure; Céline is needy of love. In common, the three sisters have their lives affected in their childhood by a tragedy caused by the attitude of their mother that accused her husband of pedophilia, never listening to his explanations and giving the chance of defense. The trio of lead actresses are great actresses and extremely beautiful, and the gorgeous Carole Bouquet is unrecognizable in the role of an old and suffered woman living her personal hell. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Inferno" ("Hell")

I'd like to begin by saying that while this film undoubtedly shows the talents of its actual director, for the sake of this commentary I will assume it is a movie by Krysztof Kieslowski. I suppose this movie needs to be viewed together with Tom Tykwer's "Heaven" (2002) in order to be understood from a broader perspective (I don't think anyone has directed "Purgatory" yet, the third part of the trilogy suggested by Kieslowski). Another important source for understanding the film is perhaps Dante's "La Divina Commedia", since this is what inspired Kieslowski in the first place.

What the film does, I think, is to offer the viewer a set of disturbing stories, from the very first opening sequence of the bird hatching and pushing the other eggs out of the nest; All these stories, right to the end of the film, never reach any satisfactory resolution. Character's lives are simply damaged or destroyed by events based on misunderstanding or ignorance, as well as human fallibility. Perhaps this is what makes for the film's theme of "Hell". If this is so, and here I can only guess at what Kieslowski's original intentions might have been, then "L'Enfer" is a very modern film in it's representation of hell as the presence of unresolved, arbitrary trauma in human life - hence perhaps the professor's speech about destiny and coincidence is of central significance in understanding the movie. This may in fact be the question the movie is supposed to put to its audience: is life a matter of destiny, or is it just coincidence? This film therefore shares with all other works directed or inspired by Kieslowski that director's strengths, as well as his weaknesses. Kieslowski had a genius for translating transcendent concepts into immanent imagery, and showing the viewer the place where eternity and time coincide; "La Double Vie de Veronique" may be the best example of this. However, that same Polish genius tended to skim lightly over the harsher, more troubling aspects of human tragedy - I would have liked to have seen him attempt a movie about the holocaust, or the life of Job, because I think shadow, while not entirely missing, is nevertheless a little too stylised in his films. Evil is unfortunately real, and while there may be light at the end of every tunnel, the way there gets very dark indeed. A great filmmaker has a responsibility to show this, especially when dealing with universal themes. Hell is not a place that has the good looks of Emanuelle Beart (funnily enough, this actress also starred in a 1994 movie with the same title)! Overall, a movie worth watching.

Just saw Tanovic's "L'Enfer" last night at Sarajevo Film Festival. Being a Bosnian himself and being the only Director from this region who has ever won an Oscar (which is a source of envy on the part of many film-makers, critics and others in the industry who use every opportunity to blemish him and his work in sensationalism-prone media), he received a seating (unfortunately, not standing) ovation from the crowd. In my view, he deserves a standing ovation for his rendering of the script of a legendary Polish film-maker, Kiezslowski.

This is Tanovic's second movie after an awe-inspiring Oscar-winning debut (for those of you who do not hold Oscar in high esteem, he won a dozen awards from film academies and organizations all over the place). One might say that "L'Enfer" is a perfectly French movie with its setting, acting and pace, just as No Man's Land perfectly captured the essence of Bosnian predicament at the time. I was impressed by Tanovic's ability to make his movies very much recognizable, and yet retaining that note of universality that is very much needed for full appreciation by the international audience.

Nothing in this movie seems redundant or out of place to me, and everything from the opening scene, which is bordering on spectacular, down to the last words of Carol Bouqet with which the movie ends is in service of good film-making. Overall, Tanovic's "L'Enfer" is a worthwhile cinematic experience, a modern tragedy well-captured by a director with an eye for a detail, and finally an exciting second movie that will be, I'm sure, appreciated by movie-goers around the globe. An intelligent, likable, and well-executed piece! I could not wish for more.

I find it hard to comment on an art film, simply because art films provide more than just statements. They pose questions, questions unanswered, questions rhetorical, questionable statements.

Hell opens with a beautifully made sequence of a bird and her 3 eggs in a nest, through a kaleidoscope vision. One of the eggs was exchanged by another bird, and its chick "killed" the other two eggs. Personally, I think it's probably the best opening sequence I've ever seen. It's both beautiful, and yet very disturbing.

Like the opening, the movie is also beautiful and disturbing. The stories between the three sisters plays powerfully, pushing you towards the revelation given by the 'boy' who shamed their father. From then onwards it's straight forward. But before that, the characters seem to be so unrelated to each other and each story seems to play just because. Well, they're not what you expected them to be.

I didn't find it to be very emotional. It is gut-wrenching, but at the same time very rational. On the other hand, its rationality does not (logically?) lead into cliché or any expected outcome. There is a great number of subtlety that you might miss, so better keep your mind alerted while watching it.

After the film about the trapped soldiers comes the film about the collection of women trapped in marital situations, love affairs and general relationships with other men; two pieces depicting routine scenarios wherein one cannot merely 'up' and walk away in spite of the simplicity of the set up. The troops in director Denis Tanovic's "No Man's Land" were of course bound by a terrifying situation involving an anti-personnel mine and their inability to merely leave it alone whilst existing perched on the frontline of a war anyway - the women in his 2005 French language drama "Hell" is a detailing of a less than terrifying proposition on paper, although one that is just as equally engrossing, as a group of people this time move freely about their surroundings whilst dealing with an array of altercations born out of time spent with the male gender.

The film follows three sisters and their tremulous paths in life born out of the presence of men. One sister of whom appears frightened of instigating a relationship; one of whom is stuck in one that is falling apart and the other of whom desires greatly to start one with somebody who's not necessarily interested. The women, respectively, are Céline (Viard); Sophie (Béart) and Anne (Gillian), three siblings occupying a Paris playing host to love-'n'-all-that, only not in the way someone unfamiliar to the city nor film making as a whole would portray such a thing in such a place. There is romance in the film, but nothing necessarily romantic about the piece, nor what people go through as a congealed whole – there are affairs and there is love, but it is tremulous and often unpleasant for those sharing in it.

Céline is a nice, polite young woman; a woman whose trauma during infanthood saw both her and her mother encounter their father/husband at his workplace at precisely the wrong time when entering into his office to catch him in the presence of a naked male infant. You might say the event has appeared to have gone on and moulded where Céline stands in terms of the opposite gender - a patient, albeit often scatty woman, she spends time with her wheelchair bound mother reciting some of the more morbid world records contained within a particular book sponsored by a particular alcoholic beverage. Céline has an admirer, a man from the past who's apparent in her life out of one, big misunderstanding from the offset. Céline is wary, since the events surrounding how she knows him are traumatic enough to leave an imprint without necessarily being enough to send her totally mad. Sexuality and sexual connotations are embroiled in the connection - when she removes her clothes for him on account of entrusting him to be reading from the same page as she is in terms of mutual attraction, history repeats itself in the most unfortunate, although rather blackly amusing, way possible. In spite of what precedes it, the gentleman is decent: someone whose sensitivity is apparent out of the fact the film establishes him to enjoy poetry and of whom seems to walk around with an analogue watch which can 'beep'.

Emmanuelle Béart's character wakes up in the morning, but not beside her husband – he's already up and too busy out in the hallway taking on the phone to another young woman, someone whose picture dons the walls of his photographic studio where he works. Desire and sexuality have often followed Béart around in the roles that she's previously undertaken, with the likes of Manon des Sources; Histoire de Marie et Julien and Nathalie... coming to mind as films depicting the actress central to relationships that range from unrequited to just plain odd and very much feature another man. Here, we have fun watching her as someone who's obviously become somewhat unappealing to a man. Where Sophie is the victim in one strand driven by an extra marital affair, Anne is busy instigating one of her own with an older man – a lecturing professor whose car of choice is an old DS19 in a story about befriending an elder suitor that runs parallel with her younger sister Célines' courting of a younger man.

If the film strikes us, then it's down to its maturity in dealing with what it depicts. The film is about women and about women and their interactions with the gentlemen they encounter that carry romantic intentions, but there is no desire to depict neither them nor the events in their life as off the wall or 'wacky'. There is an innocence to proceedings, something undercut by what is probably the most interesting of the three tales in Béart's strand – a story depicting fall out; suspicion and great anger. These are women we sense might actually exist and women whose actions have the sorts of consequences which impact upon them enough for us to sense they feel it – a lesser film may have had them pick themselves up; dust themselves down and move onto the next unrealistic, socially clumsily romantic set piece for our meager amusement. Tanovic weaves in a narrative about family feuding; memory and repent with Céline's chapter, something which actually works as a decent bookender enabling these stories to congregate together where previously there was distrust and alienation. If his aforementioned 2001 effort No Man's Land wove into the central content this exasperated story of these French U.N. soldiers plodding their way to the soldiers in need of assistance, then this burning background narrative involving a misplaced child and the core character's father from decades ago fills in for the blue helmeted squad of international support chugging across the barren landscape of war torn Yugoslavia. Whatever you take away from it, and there is content here to get excited about, the film as a congealed piece is strong and creditable.

... brought lovingly to fruition. For those living until yesterday in a remote Galaxy on the Dark side of the Milky Way maybe I should explain that the late and Great Polish writer-director Krystian Kieslowski left among his papers three Screenplays, Heaven, Hell and Purgatory and now the fine Bosnian (No Man's Land) director Danis Tanovic has shot the second part so that what we have is a Polish screenplay directed by a Bosnian with a (largely) French cast. The result is harrowing but richly rewarding and Bergman buffs will feel right at home with the doom and gloom which is present in both the story and dark interiors. With actors of the calibre of Carole Bouquet, Manu Beart, Karin Viard, Jean Rochefort and Jacques Gamblin you'd have to work at screwing it up (okay, Godard could make a pig's ear of it without trying but luckily he's unrivalled at ineptness and incompetence)and Tanovic has scrupulously and perfectly captured the writer's intention. This is a film of nuances and 'moody' to the nth degree with three sisters united by a common tragedy but distanced from each other in the present; Karin Viard is the only one who visits mother (Carole Bouquet) long institutionalized and reduced to communicating via pencil and paper. Viard turns in a career-best performance as a bruised, repressed spinster, longing for companionship and Bouquet is not far behind completely deglamorized in straggly gray hair and a wonderful way with a curtain line. Marie Gillain is perhaps the most conventional character as the youngest sister who allows herself to become pregnant by a married Sorbonne Professor - played by Jacques Perrin finally escaping his fate as a top-and-tailer; he played the narrator in both Cinema Paradiso and Les Choristes and is on on view currently in Le Petite Lieutenant - who kills himself rather than deal with the situation, and Manu Beart is the terminally unhappy wife of Jacques Gamblin. There's not a lot of joy on offer here but there are some beautifully realised cameos like the porter on the train who finally plucks up courage to approach Viard romantically after years of punching her ticket as she travels to the institution and accepts defeat of a sort - he chooses the day when the sisters have reunited and are travelling together - philosophically and Jean Rochefort as a fellow inmate of Bouquet who does little but sit on a bench but HOW he does it. If your idea of a great movie is American Pie you won't last five minutes with this one but if you value fine acting, directing and storytelling you'll want to go again.

Just saw this film at TIFF. I was quite moved by it. The voting stats here claim the film was better received by females than males. I can understand this completely. The characters all had elements a woman could relate to and some of the scenes just felt so real. Particularly the scene involving Emmanuelle Beart and her husband in the kitchen. Gosh, don't you just want to kiss her bee-stung lips?

I feel it was masterfully executed by the director (who seemed like a nice guy during his Q&A session -- great sense of humour). The cinematography, the editing, the performances. Fabulous. You could tell that Danis has a real passion for film-making and has clearly studied the greats with an exceptional eye for detail. His self-proclaimed homage to Krzysztof Kieslowski hit the mark for me with it's claustrophobic interiors and dark females haunted desperate secrets. I highly recommend this film.

Having watched this dreary film I sadly fell on the side of coincidence. Jacques Perrin ( saddened by his death in 2022 ) asks this question in a class full of students. Destiny gives meaning, coincidence does not. The opening shows that, in my opinion, where the urge to live from newly born birds is accidental. Many eggs fall to their oblivion, while a pushy one survives. No spoilers about the ' story ' of this film, and only to say that the various people in it make endless useless telephone calls, and walk out on each other without so much as a goodbye, or maybe I missed some better means of communication. I found the three sisters involved in this circus of lack of meaning boring to watch, as the film is covered in a darkly coloured oppressive gloom. Everyone in the scenario is well off enough living in Paris and I found no excuses for their inward looking selves. Carole Bouquet excels as a mute mother, but her beauty is dismissed by giving her a permanent scowl, white hair that looked like a wig and a passion for listening to stories about cannibalism and how long you can live without a head - the latter being a chicken. To sum up this film is negative to the point of boredom and in my opinion dourly directed. Since it was made in 2005 the world has moved on to an outer hell of the world being engulfed in killings and wars that should have given us all a deeper sense of being in hell.

This was wonderfully filmed. From the moment the opening credits seamlessly drew you into the start of the film I was captivated. No-one spoke for what seemed like 10mins. I found I was so intrigued by the sisters and their independent worlds that I had almost forgotten about the opening scene where the father is released from prison...until reference is made to him about half-way through the film.

Lovely cinematography (all those dark Parisian apartments), lots of story lines going on so there was plenty for the eye and mind to be working on.

Highly recommended.

I've just seen this film in a lovely air-conditioned cinema here in Bangkok. And since the temperature outside is hovering somewhere around 37C with very high humidity, my 100Bt was not wasted.

Failing that, I haven't seen such a piece of extremely well-made junk in a long time. This is the kind of film that provides a test of taste, as it were. Anyone who claims to like or love it goes immediately onto the same list of tasteless phonies who still go around talking about the superiority of British television. At least the gormless old broad in the wheelchair was good for a few guffaws.

Pseudo-profundity and fat lips, while characteristic of much French cinema, really do not a good movie make. I'd rather watch Independence Day 10 times in a row than sit through this stinker one more time.

I found this film to be visually beautiful and totally satisfying on that level. The story (already well documented here) is a bit more melodramatic than I had hoped...considering that Kieslowski (whose film I treasure) was the originator of the concept.

The saturated color throughout the film...the subtle, wordless way in which Danis Tanovic uses images to say far more than words can...is as haunting as anything I've seen in movies for many a year....probably not since Kieslowski's own work.

It seems a crime that this movie has not been released in theaters in the U.S. A real deprivation. I would urge lovers of film as art to buy the available DVD. You'll find it rewarding.

Danis Tanovic continues his Oscar worthy ways with L'Enfer.

A complete departure from the film that "No Man's Land" is, L'Enfer is visually beautiful with intricate interwoven plot lines.

The film starts out seemingly slow, a jumble of scenes with no obvious relevance or message starting with the opening title sequence. Yet as the film unfolds, early scenes come increasingly into focus, with ever intensifying clarity of understanding and pertinence.

The primary cast including Emmanuelle Beart, Karin Viard, and Marie Gillain, are brilliant, all showing top performances.

Will Tanovic receive another Oscar nod for L'Enfer? Probably not, but this film is certainly deserving of attention.

Tanovic combines a compelling and riveting narrative with powerful and believable acting by a superb cast to create a thought-provoking, challenging, and rewarding film.

Premiered tonight at the Toronto International Film Festival, the film was well received by the audience, myself included. It was suitably thought-provoking and had me later thinking back to earlier moments in the film to forge my own connections with later events. I might even call the film thought-challenging - definitely a European, not American film, and ready to deal with tough and complex issues of family, betrayal, guilt, and self-doubt.

There were definitely some disturbing scenes and themes, but between Tanovic's direction and the actors' tour de force performances, I got through them, occasionally wanting to look away but compelled to watch nonetheless. Tanovic said before the screening began that he didn't expect the audience to necessarily "enjoy" the film, but hoped that we would appreciate it and watch it through to the end. I both appreciated it and watched it through to the end, and I can say without a doubt that I did enjoy it. Bravo to Mr. Tanovic and the actresses and actors (and the others involved in the making of this film).

I would take my friends to see this film, and then go out for coffee or a drink to discuss it with them.

What is hell? Something to do with love. The love of Sophie's, of Céline's, of Anne's, of Sébastien's, of the mother's and of the Greek mythological figure Medea's their unrequited, unreciprocated love plus the mother's misjudgment on her husband.

The intricate plot of the three sisters' problems in their love life is primarily derived from the mistaken thought of their mother about their father's "sexual misbehavior". The riddle is demystified step after step to the daughters and they finally can come to relief. Only that the aged mother insists on her thought saying that she regrets nothing. She enjoys living in hell, complaining and making the other miserable.

Bosnian Danis Tanović is able to capture the French poetic cinematique style. All the actors are able to keep their bearing and flavour. Enjoyable. It is not a complicated story of vast or loud drama. It is closer to Krzysztof Kieslowski's mind. ("Heaven" somehow is novel, new in some ways, yet a little distant from KK's heart.) It is your and also my life. We live in hell at times because of mistake, misunderstanding or stubbornness.

It's the title translated into the English title and a very appropriate at that. A shame in Germany they translated it into "Like in Hell". Why bother doing something like this, if you can translate literally?

The narrative of the film is concerned with three women, who all have there problems, dealing with life, but also with something else. Some might have read the novel, on which this movie is based upon, so they know, but for all the others (including me), this is something that will be revealed later. But what happens in between the beginning and the end of the movie, is a great drama, that deals with life and everyday problems. You have three strong female performers here, that work great with the superb script they are given here. This is as gripping as life can sometimes be!

We enjoyed this this evening, though it is, I think, true to say that it wasn't fun. It's stylish, as you'd expect from a French film, but bleak. The three sisters really do take their tragic childhood very seriously and seem determined to have it copulate (imdb is prudish about reviews) their lives up as much as possible - strangely they don't take the opportunity of a shared childhood with each other to try to get over it, but rather indulge in gloomy comparisons with Medea.

Professorial comments in French classes, if this is anything to go by, are truly risible. The idea that, whether life is deterministic or not is simply a matter of aesthetic appeal is truly adolescent. Still, the way he says it, it makes it sound profound - but, as Henry Higgins pointed out a long time ago, that's the French way, it doesn't matter much what you say as long as you pronounce it correctly.

I wasn't sure quite why there was the homage to the three colours films. In all of them, an old woman has trouble getting a bottle into a bottle bank, and in this another old woman has the same problem. Maybe it isn't homage, maybe French bottle banks are a notorious old woman trap, but I doubt it. Is it just that this is also supposed to be part of a trilogy of films?

There was a very good line early on in the film that I thought that I ought to remember, it sounded exactly right to me. Sadly, though, it can't have been that good (or the rest of film was so absorbing) that I can't remember what it was. Anybody else who has seen it might be able to help, it was an amusing line - somebody, a chap, said it in a hall way, if that helps.

I liked the cuckoo sequence - though it wasn't that clear who was supposed to be the cuckoo and who the children turfed out of the nest, particularly when you knew all the facts. I suppose that it fitted well with the defenestration, if nothing else.

Evian being, vaguely, naive in mirror writing was a nice touch - it is, of course, naive, or something, to spend money on water when you can get it from the tap for next to nothing, but the makers of Evian mightn't find it the best advertisement ever.

Is it really true that you can keep a headless chicken alive for several months? I doubt that. Almost a thousand people seem a lot for a cannibal to eat, even over a lifetime, even a cannibal chief, especially if he only avoided eating the completely indigestible bits. But then, I suppose that it must be true.

I'd recommend it, though, as a fairly intelligent evening out. It isn't as good as one of the thee colours films - I've watched each of those several times and I'd only consider watching this again to pick up the bon mot in the first ten minutes that I've forgotten. I did like the kaleidoscopic images, though, I suppose that it is noteworthy that they have three mirrors...

By cwgraul Apr 05, 2020 Kieslowski's visual ideas realized, but characterizations lagging. "HELL" is one of a trilogy left behind by the Polish director Kieslowski; "Heaven" was made by the German director Tom Tykwer in 2002 (starring Kate Blanchett) and was a better film. I liked "Hell," and recognize the director tried to create the careful pacing that Kieslowski himself displayed in his films. However, the characters do not sparkle, or invite empathy. Unfortunately, often deliberate pacing is at the cost of immediacy. However, this was never the case when Kieslowski directed his own films (see "Blue" for an example), and was not the case with Tykwer's brilliant "Heaven." I am still awaiting someone to make the definitive third part of the trilogy: "Purgatory." My understanding is the script was completed also.

After seeing this great film on the big screen I had to think of the composer Salieri as shown in the film "Amadeus" (based on Peter Shaffer's play). There he says about the perfection of Mozart's music that it would neither be possible to take one note away nor to add one. The same applies for me to "L'enfer"/"Hell". From start to finish every detail is absolutely spot on. There was no question for me if I should buy the DVD when it came out or not. It has a special place in my collection and I show/see it only with friends who really can appreciate a good and meaningful film with depth to it.

When looking at the information on this website about the writers of the film I can see why often giving credits to the writing can be problematic. As the DVD has as an extra background information and clips about the making of L'enfer I seem to remember from it that the fantastic director had a lot of input into it. At least one of the main actresses commented that he actually recreated the script and made it his own. Though he might not have done this in written form his handwriting is all over the end-product. This, and also in many other ways as you can find out when you watch the DVD extras yourself, makes it such a beautiful "round" piece of art.

Art is done by artists, and therefore great art is created by great artists. This director belongs definitely to the latter. He didn't even attempt to make it a "Kieszlowski film". Much better, he made it absolutely his own. Kieszlowski would have been proud of it (what, on the other hand, I unfortunately can't say at all about the "prequel" Heaven by my fellow country-man Tom Tykwer). For me it is therefore also the best memorial for that great and important Polish director who died so prematurely.

Really, I am a fan of French cinema in general. This film though seems a copy of the worst in B-grade American films set in France. The cinematography and acting are good. But really in the end L'enfer is a trope and cliché filled melodrama. It seems made not from the French point of view, but that of someone who does not know France visiting the country.

The "surprise" ending is telegraphed a million miles away. Lesson: all men, at least all straight men, are dogs. You've seen this theme a thousand times, and in virtually every case done better.

3/10 stars.